- November 8, 1983 -- Thomas Wayne murdered. Bruce is 8. (Date from some casefile or something).
- 1996 -- Joe Chill paroled. Bruce expelled from Princeton and leaves Gotham. He is 21.
- 1996-2003 -- Seven year absence from Gotham. Training.
- 2003 -- Bruce returns to Gotham at 28yo. R&D for Batman. Batman's first night.
- 2005 -- League of Shadows attack on Gotham on Bruce's 30th birthday. There is about 2-years between Bruce's return and the LOS attack.
- 2005-2008 -- three year off-screen war on crime;
- 2008 -- events of The Dark Knight occur. New Batsuit. Bruce is 33;
- 2008 -- last confirmed sighting of Batman after Dent's death;
- 2008-2016 -- eight year gap between confirmed sightings;
- 2016 -- Events of The Dark Knight Rises, Bruce is 41.

To support the three-year gap between Begins/TDK.
- Jim Gordon's son is 2-years-old in Begins. He's clearly older than 3 in TDK. At least 6.
- The Dark Knight manual references that Batman used the Begins suit for 5-years. 2003-2008. First night through TDK's new Batsuit.
- A gap between Begins and TDK explains why the Joker has a reputation with the mobsters and his bank robbery accomplices.
- The gap between Batman's first night and the LOS attack also allows time for Ras al Ghul to exile Bane before his death.

That would mean Bruce was Batman for 5-years ... 2003-2005 (Begins); 2005-2008 (b/w Begins and TDK); 2016 (TDKR). I also like the idea of unconfirmed Batman sightings in 2009 and 2010, before Bruce's injury and official retirement. So, you might be able to stretch it to 6-years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

Joker: "A year ago these Cops and lawyers wouldn't dare cross any of you"

This may not reference a year since Batman's initial appearance. Just one year since Batman is having enough impact to scare them into daylight meetings.

More specifically, looking at the seasons, one can assume that somewhere around 15 months elapse between Bruce's return to Gotham (late spring or summer) and the events of "The Dark Knight" (autumn).

And while "The Dark Knight" seems to occur over the short time span of a few days or a week, most seem to forget that the events of "Batman Begins" (at least, those set in the "present-day" Gotham) span at least several weeks, if not months.

In particular, there must be a great length of time between Batman's defeat of Ra's on the train and his meeting with Gordon on the rooftops at the end (long enough for Gordon and the GCPD to have rounded up half of the escaped Arkham inmates).

__________________

Only one site has Batman news that they secretly knew all along but kept secret from you for your sake until someone else reported it!

Well Begins keeps jumping back and forth in time. We certainly do not feel like we watched 7 years go by when Bruce is doing his traveling/training. I remember being surprised when Alfred says on the plane that Bruce has been gone 7 years.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Well, that's probably because most of Bruce's traveling happens before Ra's finds him in the Tibet prison. The fact that Bruce demonstrates multiple fighting styles when he first arrives at the monastery is the movie's way of showing us that he's been abroad for a while.

I figure Bruce's time training with the LoS was somewhere between a few months to 1 year max.

He didn't say that either. He said "a year ago, they wouldn't touch any of you." That's it. He didn't say why, specifically, except "The Batman" is why they have their little meetings in broad daylight. Maybe a year ago was Batman's first appearance. Maybe a year ago was about the time Batman made enough progress against the mob & cop corruption to make a dent in the city's crime problem. Maybe a year ago, the cops and lawyers jumped on the Batman bandwagon. Either way, you're filling in a blank.

But, it is clear there's much more than a year between Begins and TDK just from the age of Gordon's son. He goes from 3ish to 7ish between Begins and TDK.

Right. Until Batman Begins when they did start daring to touch them. Unless you missed Rachel and Finch going after Falcone and having him indited after Batman gave them all the dirt on him.

It's not hard to put two and two together here.

That was a continuity goof. After all it wouldn't take 4 years to rebuild Wayne Manor. It certainly wouldn't take Joker 4 years of being a bank robber before he eventually made his big move.

Choose your interpretation. If you insist on interpreting the "year ago" line that way ... it seems at least as likely that the "year ago" throwaway line is a continuity goof. If you're going to just ignore an annoying detail ... why not ignore that one?

A three-year gap makes more sense in the timeline. It coincides with the kids ages. It coincides with the 5-years of using the Begins suit (as referenced in one of the movie tie-in manuals). And, it makes Wayne's Batman service-time work better for the overall story (five-years before the 'retirement' + plus a year during the Bane incident). Makes far more sense in continuity than the whole first two movies happening within a year ... at which point Wayne retires at 31, and has already acquired a chronic injury. Makes no sense at all.

Choose your interpretation. If you insist on interpreting the "year ago" line that way ... it seems at least as likely that the "year ago" throwaway line is a continuity goof. If you're going to just ignore an annoying detail ... why not ignore that one?

Because it's not an annoying detail. Even if your 4 year gap was right, it would still be a continuity goof. Gordon's kid in Begins was a little crying baby being spoon fed by Mrs. Gordon. In TDK he was at the very least 8 years old.

No matter who's math you choose, it's a continuity goof.

Quote:

A three-year gap makes more sense in the timeline. It coincides with the kids ages.

No it doesn't. I've just proven that.

Quote:

It coincides with the 5-years of using the Begins suit (as referenced in one of the movie tie-in manuals).

Manuals are as valid as Novelizations. As in not at all.

Quote:

And, it makes Wayne's Batman service-time work better for the overall story (five-years before the 'retirement' + plus a year during the Bane incident).

Except the time line of the movies doesn't support that. That's just wishful thinking on your part.

Quote:

Makes far more sense in continuity than the whole first two movies happening within a year.

It doesn't make one lick of sense. Not for the ages of the kid, not for the idea that Joker sat around being a thief for 5 years, and not that it took 5 long years just to rebuild Wayne Manor.

Your 5 year timeline is false.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Haha. Of course its false. Its fiction. There is no timeline. Using any timeline at all is an exercise in retroactively choosing which continuity errors to ignore to try to fit it together in a way that makes sense.

You ignore the kids ages. You ignore the ridiculously short duration of use of the first batsuit. You ignore the absurdity of super-ninja Bruce Wayne acquiring a chronic injury in a year. Or the absurdity of cleaning up a corrupt-to-the-core city and retiring that fast. Or that Ras had no time to train, use and exile Bane between Bruce leaving him for dead the first time (in the Himalayas) and Bruce leaving him for dead the second time (on the train).

All because the Joker said "a year ago these cops and lawyers wouldn't dare cross any of you", which you interpret to coincide with Batman's first appearance.

For what its worth ... I said a 3-year gap between BB and TDK. On my timeline, the events of Begins took 2-years from his initial return to Gotham to the League of Shadows attack. 2-years for BB + 3-years between BB & TDK = 5-years total service time by the time he retires.

So, the Joker would've been operating as a small-time criminal for 2 or 3-years between BB and TDK ... not 5. He didn't start at the same time as Batman. Sounds fine to me.

Choose your interpretation. If you insist on interpreting the "year ago" line that way ... it seems at least as likely that the "year ago" throwaway line is a continuity goof. If you're going to just ignore an annoying detail ... why not ignore that one?

A three-year gap makes more sense in the timeline. It coincides with the kids ages. It coincides with the 5-years of using the Begins suit (as referenced in one of the movie tie-in manuals). And, it makes Wayne's Batman service-time work better for the overall story (five-years before the 'retirement' + plus a year during the Bane incident). Makes far more sense in continuity than the whole first two movies happening within a year ... at which point Wayne retires at 31, and has already acquired a chronic injury. Makes no sense at all.

KBZ

Plus Harvey starts hinting at commitment like marriage to Rachel. If they were together for 1 year max or even 8 months, it just doesn't make sense.

The 3 years of them being together would make sense within the story of TDK and adds even more weight to Harvey's pain than if he was dating her for 8 months or whatever. Of course he would still lose it but it just adds a lot more weight to everything.

BUT Joker could be right.

Bane is older than Bruce in TDKR. He trained with Ras before Bruce and was excommunicated. Talia is in her early 30s in Rises, even though Marion's older than Anne I got the impression they were closer in age in the movie. Im assuming young Talia in the pit, was about the age of 8 like Bruce was when his parents were shot down. Bane should be about 21/22 (think college Bruce). Younger Ras looks to be in his late 20s like when Bruce was dumped on the side of the road in order to find that rare blue flower. There's a reason why they all mirror each other.

So, since Ras is about 50 in Begins, we can assume that it's been somewhere between 20 to 25 years since. Ill guess 23.

This puts Talia at about 31. Bane at about 44/45. Somebody on the film in an interview (was it Emma?) said Bane is a lot older than we think.

We know TDK is July/August 2008. So TDKR begins in August-ish of 2016 for Harvey Dent Day. It ends within the first couple of months of 2017 and then probably fast forward to March or April for the ending reveals where Bruce gives each of his friends signs of him being alive.

If you go by the popular opinion. He's 30 in Begins, he's 31 in TDK, 39 when Rises starts and closer to 40 when the trilogy ends. But some people who think a few years passed between BB & TDK? He would be 33 in TDK and 41 going on 42 in TDKR.

But finally, I do think that it's possible months flew by while Bruce was creating everything to become Batman. He is 30 in Begins but I think there could be a significant jump from the moment Bruce/Rachel/Alfred are at the sight of Wayne Manor to the rooftop scene where Gordon shows Bats the Joker card. Months? Close to a year? There's a lot of inmates to gather up. Then you got Joker building his reputation while Rachel and Harvey are dating and getting more serious.

__________________"Lets make one thing very clear here - Nolan's films are as faithful an adaptation as there is. It pays homage to its source material, remains true to its characters and above all else places the story first and foremost." - jmc

Plus Harvey starts hinting at commitment like marriage to Rachel. If they were together for 1 year max or even 8 months, it just doesn't make sense.

Why not? People have got engaged after a few months of dating. When you know, you know.

I mean Batman Begins asked us to believe Rachel and Bruce were in love when Bruce had been gone for 7 years. The last time she saw him she slapped his face and told him his dad would be ashamed of him. We never saw the vaguest hint there was anything romantic between them until their final scene in BB.

Then we have The Dark Knight Rises, where we're told Bruce gave up on a normal life because a woman he never even dated or had sex with was dead, and he thought she had been his only shot at a normal life. We won't even get started on Bruce and Selina running away abroad together after knowing each other for like a day and a half (not counting the months he was locked away abroad in the pit thanks to her betrayal of him).

Compare all of that nonsense to Harvey and Rachel intimately dating for several months before considering marriage which is far more plausible, not to mention common in the real world.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePhantasm

I think it is funny that The Joker here is being accused of creating a fan fiction timeline when he is drawing conclusions exclusively from what the films themselves state.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Well, I find that far-fetched with Harvey and Rachel. That's not the same thing (Rachel and bruce) because they've been best friends since children. They were teenagers together and early 20s. It's a different story.

There was no love stuff being thrown at the audience between Selina and Bruce, they just felt connected and took a chance with each other at the end because they had that stuff in common with wanting to start over. Very different from all of it.

__________________"Lets make one thing very clear here - Nolan's films are as faithful an adaptation as there is. It pays homage to its source material, remains true to its characters and above all else places the story first and foremost." - jmc

You find two people dating for several months and then considering marriage far fetched?

Yeah ok.

Quote:

That's not the same thing (Rachel and bruce) because they've been best friends since children. They were teenagers together and early 20s. It's a different story.

So? They never had any romantic relationship. They never slept together, we never even saw them share a kiss until the end of Begins. Before that scene all you saw was a friendship all through Begins, and one that had a large 7 year gap in it.

But based on that Bruce was convinced she was the only hope he had at a normal life. A woman he never even had one date with.

Quote:

There was no love stuff being thrown at the audience between Selina and Bruce

What you mean apart from the big kiss she gave him at the end, and then her being the woman Bruce is happy ever after with in Alfred's fantasy scenario in the cafe in Florence.

Quote:

they just felt connected and took a chance with each other at the end because they had that stuff in common with wanting to start over. Very different from all of it.

So you can buy Bruce and Selina just felt a connection on the most brief acquaintanceship and took a chance on each other to run off together. That's plausible for you. But you find Harvey and Rachel actually having steady dating and getting to know each other for months, and falling in love, no doubt feeling a connection, too, then considering marriage far fetched?

You see the irony here.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

You find two people dating for several months and then considering marriage far fetched?

Yeah ok.

Yes. I find it ridiculous. Several months? Are you kidding? And we wonder as a society, why so many marriages end in divorce after a few years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

So? They never had any romantic relationship. They never slept together, we never even saw them share a kiss until the end of Begins. Before that scene all you saw was a friendship all through Begins, and one that had a large 7 year gap in it.

But based on that Bruce was convinced she was the only hope he had at a normal life. A woman he never even had one date with.

I truly think Bruce was overthinking their kind of love. I still believe they were more linked with each other as best friends, almost like step brother and step sister who were close but not related. I think Rachel moved on with Harvey and Bruce has such a weird psyche that he really believed there was more to it than that. It's because she was the only woman he's ever got to know that well and loved in any way as he grew up. There's that link to his childhood and parents. But he was wrong. Selina could very well be his "soulmate" but who knows. It seems that way though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

What you mean apart from the big kiss she gave him at the end, and then her being the woman Bruce is happy ever after with in Alfred's fantasy scenario in the cafe in Florence.

Well, it wasn't as pronounced through words like with Rachel. It's more of a chemistry, spiritual connection they seem to have. He could end up living happily ever after with her but we cant know that for sure. The idea is that he TRIES to live his life and move on with someone that he feels connected to. That's Selina. But I don't think it's such a love kind of thing. I never got the feeling they were in love with each other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

So you can buy Bruce and Selina just felt a connection on the most brief acquaintanceship and took a chance on each other to run off together. That's plausible for you. But you find Harvey and Rachel actually having steady dating and getting to know each other for months, and falling in love, no doubt feeling a connection, too, then considering marriage far fetched?

You see the irony here.

Running off together is very different from marriage lol. Selina and Bruce make a choice, taking a chance to leave together because they feel something towards one another. Harvey and Rachel have been dating for months sure, but I still find months of dating to proposing absolutely ridiculous. I don't care what couple you are in this life.

__________________"Lets make one thing very clear here - Nolan's films are as faithful an adaptation as there is. It pays homage to its source material, remains true to its characters and above all else places the story first and foremost." - jmc

Do you see marriage after months of dating on these lists and surveys?

Quote:

I truly think Bruce was overthinking their kind of love.

You don't say. He only spent 8 years living no life for a woman who chose someone she had an actual relationship with. To say he was over thinking it is a huge understatement.

Quote:

I still believe they were more linked with each other as best friends, almost like step brother and step sister who were close but not related.

I would agree. But Batman Begins asked us to believe they were in love at the end. That's what it told us. After painting a relationship that looked nothing more than a friendship, and not even a closely knit one considering he flit off for 7 years, and never even told her he was back when he did come back. Let his so called best friend know he wasn't dead, instead of letting her hear it from second hand sources.

That and Bruce and Selina slitting off together is far more implausible and unbelievable than Harvey and Rachel's relationship which was very realistic.

Quote:

I think Rachel moved on with Harvey and Bruce has such a weird psyche that he really believed there was more to it than that. It's because she was the only woman he's ever got to know that well and loved in any way as he grew up. There's that link to his childhood and parents. But he was wrong. Selina could very well be his "soulmate" but who knows. It seems that way though.

In other words Bruce was being an idiot. He put all his hopes on a woman he never had a romantic relationship with. Someone he never even had a date with. Someone who even said to him "Don't make me your one hope for a normal life".

Again this scenario was more implausible than Rachel and Harvey's which was entirely realistic.

Quote:

Well, it wasn't as pronounced through words like with Rachel. It's more of a chemistry, spiritual connection they seem to have.

Based on a day and half's acquaintanceship. In other words their relationship was predicated on very little, whereas Rachel and Dent's was predicated on months of being together.

Your complaint is contradictory.

Quote:

He could end up living happily ever after with her but we cant know that for sure.

That's the same as a marriage isn't it. There's no guarantee it will last forever. The people involved do it because they love each other and it feels right for them. The smart ones make such big shows of devotion, whether it's a proposal or running away together, based on a relationship that is longer than a few days.

Quote:

The idea is that he TRIES to live his life and move on with someone that he feels connected to. That's Selina. But I don't think it's such a love kind of thing. I never got the feeling they were in love with each other.

Then you missed the point of them being in Alfred's fantasy scenario where Bruce finally found someone, in this case Selina.

Quote:

Running off together is very different from marriage lol.

Yeah, running away abroad from your life with someone you barely know is much more drastic.

In Harvey and Rachel's situation all he did was propose marriage. He never put a time stamp on when they will get married. For all you know it could be a long engagement. Many couples of have them.

Quote:

Harvey and Rachel have been dating for months sure, but I still find months of dating to proposing absolutely ridiculous. I don't care what couple you are in this life.

That's your ignorance then. There's thousands of couples all over the world still happily married from the same types of situations.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"